On 4/12/2014 5:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 04/12/14 00:00, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On December 3, 2014 4:53:23 PM EST, Chris Johns<chr...@rtems.org> wrote:
>On 3/12/2014 7:46 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>The dummy.c is a de-facto default configuration so use unlimited
>objects
>>and the stack checker. This makes it easier for new RTEMS users
>which
>>will likely use this file if they just work with the usual main()
>>function as the application entry point. Provide proper arguments
>for
>>main() using the BSP command line. Add spare user extensions and
>>drivers.
>
>I am still confused. Does this mean we have 2 pieces of code doing the
>same thing ?
>
>If this is to be the one 'main' reference we have when I think it needs
>
>a name that suites. The current name dummy should go. Plus what happens
>
>to the code in bspinit.c ?
It should be in cpukit. Merge two into one and rename dummy.c
The bspinit.c only provides a Init() function that calls main(). It
doesn't provide a configuration.
Ah of course. Why not move the bspinit.c one into the cpukit and use
that rather than add another copy ?
If you look at the README file in the
dummy directory, then I am not sure if we should rename this file.
It also says it should never run and your commit comment says otherwise.
This has been confusing me.
I still do not like dummy as this is more of a defaultinit because it
could be useful to new users.
Chris
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
